MARINE MAMMAL COMMISSION — Annual Report for 1992 
determining optimum yield was cited as evidence that 
the scope of the Act went beyond fishery resources. 
Prosecutors also pointed to section 114(g)(3) of the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act, which directs the 
Secretary of Commerce to request that the Fishery 
Management Councils established under the Magnuson 
Act take actions necessary to mitigate adverse impacts 
to marine mammals from fisheries under certain cir- 
cumstances, to support the view that regulation of 
fisheries to protect marine mammals or other non- 
fishery resources is appropriate. Moreover, section 
114(g)(3) specifically includes adjustments to require- 
ments with respect to fishing times and areas as possi- 
ble actions that might be taken by the Councils to 
protect marine mammals. 
The court ruled from the bench at a 10 January 
1992 hearing, upholding the Service’s regulations as 
a proper exercise of its authority under the Magnuson 
Act. No written opinion was published in this case. 
Trustees for Alaska v. Lujan 
Trustees for Alaska filed suit on 8 August 1990 
seeking to halt oil and gas exploration activities being 
conducted in the Chukchi Sea, alleging that unautho- 
rized takings of walruses had and would continue to 
occur. This lawsuit, originally filed with the Ninth 
Circuit Court of Appeals, was refiled with the District 
Court for the District of Alaska on 19 February 1991 
after the appellate court ruled that it did not have 
original jurisdiction of the matter under the Outer 
Continental Shelf Lands Act, as plaintiffs had argued. 
The plaintiff's complaint alleged that exploratory 
drilling activities authorized by the Minerals Manage- 
ment Service were likely to take walruses in violation 
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act if conducted in 
the vicinity of the retreating or advancing ice edge. 
The plaintiff also noted that although the oil com- 
panies operating in the Chukchi Sea had requested 
authorization from the Fish and Wildlife Service for 
the incidental take of small numbers of walruses and 
polar bears under section 101(a)(5) of the Act, such 
authorization had yet to be issued. A motion for 
summary judgment was filed by the plaintiff on 14 
May 1991. Federal defendants filed a cross-motion 
for summary judgment on 14 June 1991, contending 
that the plaintiff had not sufficiently demonstrated that 
walruses would be taken if the exploratory activities 
were allowed to proceed. 
While the summary judgment motions were pend- 
ing, the Fish and Wildlife Service completed its 
rulemaking and issued letters of authorization pursuant 
to section 101(a)(5) of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act authorizing the taking of walruses and polar bears 
incidental to oil and gas exploration in the Chukchi 
Sea. Consequently on 2 July 1991 Federal defendants 
filed a motion to dismiss the case as being moot. The 
court granted that motion and on 1 April 1992 dis- 
missed the case. 
Greenpeace v. Franklin 
Greenpeace and other environmental groups filed 
suit on 26 June 1991 seeking to invalidate the 1991 
pollock harvest level adopted by the National Marine 
Fisheries Service. Plaintiffs alleged that the quotas 
established for the pollock fishery violated section 7 
of the Endangered Species Act and the National 
Environmental Policy Act. On 29 December 1992 the 
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court 
ruling that the Federal defendants had satisfied the 
requirements of those statutes. Further discussion of 
this case is provided in the Steller sea lion section of 
Chapter III. 
“Operation Whiteout” 
A two-year undercover investigation by Fish and 
Wildlife Service agents, known as “Operation White- 
out,” resulted in the indictment of 29 individuals 
during 1992 for violations of the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act, the Lacey Act, and Federal drug and 
conspiracy laws. Charges against four of those in- 
dividuals were later dropped. 
Among the alleged violations were the wasteful 
taking of walrus (i.e., headhunting) and the illegal 
sale of marine mammal parts. Other charges involved 
the exchange of marine mammal parts for drugs. Of 
the cases pursued by Federal prosecutors, all resulted 
in convictions or guilty pleas. The 25 defendants 
were convicted on a total of 67 counts, including 20 
misdemeanor violations of the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act and 20 felonies and 6 misdemeanors 
